REVIEW: How not to write a survival novel

As a gift, the Gardener received a book entitled, "Patriot: How to survive the coming collapse". Well, I picked it up and read it. It was an interesting read, though, as a novel, was really bad at telling the story. It seemed like the novel was trying to take on three different forms; encyclopedic reference book for survival techniques, apocalyptic story, and opinion brief of federalist case law (citizen rights vs. state rights and federal government rights).

As a reference guide, it was really thorough. You can learn how to set up a retreat (some might refer to it as an anti-government compound, ala Waco or Ruby Ridge), plant a garden, build explosive type devices (thermite grenades), organize and train a militia and all that other fun stuff you might want to do as a survivalist.

As an opinion brief, I can't really say anything. There is a part in the book when one of the characters spouts case after case about the natural right people have to possess fire arms and that any infringement on that right is unconstitutional, even in the case of an assault weapons ban. This character also professed that the state governments overstep their bounds requiring people to register property or obtain licenses to travel via car on public roads. Again, I am no lawyer and cannot offer any opinion as to all this. But the author must have found it important to put it in there.

As a novel, it was really weird. To give some background, the author has adapted this book to current day situations a few times since the first version in the early 90's. This version talks about the collapse of the American Government due to a combination of excessive hyperinflation, disease and failed infrastructure. The main characters in the novel gather at the retreat to wait out the bad events and defend their property from lawlessness. Well, it turns out that an international committee sets up a new federal government and wages war (with UN troops) on the multiple militia/survivalist groups. Well, you can guess who wins and what the happy ending will be.

One good part of the ending was the reversion of a currency value based on a hard asset, as opposed to fiat money. That is always a plus in my eyes.

I don't necessarily agree with all the ideas/conclusions that the author draws, but it made you think.

One aside: The author takes a subtle jab at the Mormons for caving to the new government, under the notion that Mormons support whatever government happens to be around at the time. I would like to think that Mormons, if a government as abusive as the one depicted actually came to exist, would have a little more backbone and fight.

In summary, if you are going to write a novel like this, don't try to write it in three different styles. If you want to write an apocalyptic novel, go for it. If you want to write a thesis about law cases, do it. If you want to write a reference manual about how to be a survivalist, have at it. Don't try to combine all three into one.